Abbreviated Pundit Roundup: Decisions

[Brexiter]

We begin today with René Pflster, Marc Pitzke, and Ronald Nelles of Der Spiegel writing about “not the odds but the stakes” (to quote NYU media professor Jay Rosen) of the upcoming American presidential election.

U.S. voters are casting their ballots in four months, and Trump has never been stronger in the public opinion polls than he is right now. Following the televised debate between the former president and incumbent Joe Biden – a catastrophic evening for Biden – Trump received yet another boost. According to a new nationwide survey, Trump’s advantage has grown since then. And in all seven swing states, where the presidential election is likely to be decided, the 78-year-old Trump is ahead of 81-year-old Biden, according to the New York Timespoll tracker. Trump will officially be proclaimed the Republican candidate at the convention in mid-July – the leader of a party that has completely prostrated itself to him.

The November 5 election, of course, is far from being decided, but many liberal Americans like Paul Starobin are convinced that a second Trump term would be even more radical that the years following his first election in November 2016, when even Trump himself didn’t think he would end up in the White House. [...]

The United States is currently facing a question that is of core importance for every liberal order: How to deal with a politician who seeks to destroy the very system that installed him in a position of power? How can democracy defend itself against those who hate democracy? Trump hasn’t exactly sought to keep his plans secret: He wants to use the judiciary to exact revenge on his enemies, intending to go after Biden and his family along with all others who he sees as his enemies. Those who seek to stand in his way will – should Trump’s plans come to fruition – find themselves under pressure from the Internal Revenue Service, which has all it needs to drive any dissident to ruin with an endless stream of audits.

Rex Huppke of USA Today covers the utter incoherence and lies of yet another Trump speech at a political rally.

During the event, the former president slurred words, claimed his son Don Jr. is married when he’s actually just engaged, and consistently described the world around him in a manner wholly inconsistent with reality.

During one heartbreaking moment, Trump stopped talking for a full minute while the usual eerie music favored by an unhinged conspiracy group called QAnonplayed in the background. He sweatily moved his head back and forth and randomly pointed at people, appearing to not know exactly what he was doing.

[...]

At one point during Tuesday’s rally, Trump said tourists who go to Washington, D.C., and visit the Jefferson Memorial or the Washington Monument “end up getting shot, mugged, raped.” It was troubling to see a man hoping to become president again act so confused. Violent crime in the District of Columbia is down more than 20% this year, as crime nationwide has plummeted.

Apparently, the media double standard continues.

University of Utah Associate Professor of Communications Jacob L. Nelson writes for The Conversation about an additional explanation for journalists playing up the post-debate Joe Biden story.

First, when it comes to reporting, journalists value sudden turns of events – also known as “timeliness.” They especially value those that unfold in a very public way – known as “spectacle.” The debate offered both. Until then, journalists and the public alike hadn’t regularly monitored or covered Biden’s age, other than a few notable outlets, such as The Wall Street Journal. The debate offered a live opportunity for the world to see firsthand why there have been concerns about electing an 81-year-old to a second term.

Second, journalists depend on sources for their reporting. Unsurprisingly, as soon as Biden’s halting debate performance began, political reporters began hearing from panicked insiders, who appear to have jump-started the “replacing Biden” discussion.

As a scholar who explores the relationship between journalism and the public, I believe these sources are venting to journalists as a way to keep the spotlight on this news story. That’s a major part of the reason for this coverage, which each day seems to bring with it fresh quotes, leaks and scoops about Biden’s age from people involved in Democratic Party politics.

Adam Serwer of The Atlantic offers an analysis of some media coverage of a draft of the 2024 GOP platform which offers yet more examples of media “strategic illiteracy.”

On Monday, a draft of the GOP platform began circulating ahead of the Republican convention. The coverage of the platform’s position on abortion was remarkable in its uniformity. The New York Times’ headline blared, “Following Trump’s Lead, Republicans Adopt Platform That Softens Stance on Abortion.” NBC News announced, “Trump Pushes New GOP Platform Softening Party’s Positions on Abortion and Same-Sex Marriage.” The Washington Post concurred: “GOP Adopts Platform That Softens Language on Abortion, Same-Sex Marriage.” These headlines could not be more misleading. (One outlet, The 19th, commendably got it right.)

First, although the new platform omits language from the 2016 version opposing marriage equality, it is silent on equal rights for same-sex couples, and certainly does not endorse them. That omission is meaningful, and should not be interpreted as moderation. The Trumpified right-wing majority on the Supreme Court has already taken quiet aim at the decision that granted same-sex couples the right to marry, and some of the sitting justices, such as Samuel Alito, have denounced that decision outright. Once the right-wing bloc on the Court has the numbers and the right case, that decision will likely be overturned. [...]

Second, if the party’s stance on marriage equality is a matter of strategic silence, the media coverage of the abortion language amounts to strategic illiteracy. Here is the plank, under a heading that reads “Republicans Will Protect and Defend a Vote of the People, From Within the States, on the Issue of Life”:

Paul Krugman of The New York Times continues his inquiry into the actual economic trends vs. the so-called “vibe-cession.”

What, then, are the facts that a story about economic perceptions should explain beyond poor consumer sentiment? I’d single out four observations.

First, while consumer sentiment is weak, consumer spending has remained strong, essentially in line with its prepandemic trend:

Second, Americans are vastly more positive about their personal financial situation than they are about the economy as a whole…

Third, Americans are much more positive about their state or local economy than they are about the national economy….

Last, perceptions of the economy have become extremely partisan. Here’s what the venerable Michigan survey says:

Heather Thompson writes for El País in English writes that better bus systems could very well lead to more affordable housing in America’s cities.

Our bus systems are one of the most essential but neglected pieces of public transit infrastructure in cities. Bus rapid transit(BRT), a type of system which operates like a metro at ground-level using buses, can carry more people faster and more reliably than cars and even conventional buses. BRT has been expanding in many places in the U.S. and certainly demands much greater attention.

Relative to other types of transit like metro rail, BRT can carry roughly the same amount of people per vehicle at significantly lower costs to build and operate. Compared to cars, BRT systems can shuttle tens of thousands of passengers an hour using the same amount of road space that would only move a few hundred if people travel by private vehicle. The fundamental features of BRT provide a bigger blueprint for improving all public transit by using elements like dedicated lanes, level-boarding for accessibility, and off-board fare collection to make services faster and simpler.

As the concept of BRT becomes more familiar, some U.S. cities are even emerging as BRT leaders. From the country’s first system in Pittsburgh (whose success has propelled more recent investments) to San Francisco’s 2022 debut of its Van Nesscorridor, there is growing BRT enthusiasm amongst transit agencies and everyday riders. It can and should be recognized as one of the most cost-effective, quick-to-implement pieces of transit infrastructure that can help improve air quality, create jobs, and get people where they’re going quickly and affordably.

Finally today, Taylor Lorenz of The Washington Post notes the prominence of digital content creators at the NATO summit taking place in Washington D.C., which ends today.

NATO invited 16 content creators from member nations including Belgium, Canada, the United States and Britain to attend the summit. The United States is running its own social media mission in support. An additional 27 creators were invited to the summit by the Defense Department and the State Department, which last year became the first Cabinet-level agency to establish a team dedicated to partnerships with digital content creators.

The creators have large followings on platforms including TikTok, YouTube and Instagram, and cover topics ranging from politics to national security to news, current events and pop culture. In the space of 48 hours this week, a band of creators met with top officials from the most powerful institutions in D.C., including the Pentagon and State Department. At the White House, they met with John Kirby, President Biden’s national security communications adviser. At least two creators were granted interviews with Secretary of State Antony Blinken.

Deploying social media stars in D.C. could engage NATO at a critical moment with a generation born after the enemy it was formed to resist had dissolved. The backing of Biden and unified support for Ukraine has strengthened the alliance. But concern is rising inside NATO at the possibility that Donald Trump, who uses the alliance as a punching bag in stump speeches, could return to the White House.

Everyone have the best possible day!